Man shoots, kills elderly man with Alzheimer’s at Walker County, Ga., home

[sir pball]

30. Can you drop that "only requires belief" meme? ALL SD laws "only require belief", even DTR ones.

For the record, I don't support this guy and I do think he should be charged with negligent homicide or somesuch...yeah, dementia patients can be aggressive, but I don't buy it. Lock the damn door and call the cops.

Anyway, here's the relevant NY statutes, a non-SYG state - if I'm boring you, skip to the question after the quote please. (redacted for brevity, emphasis added):

Sec. 35.10 Justification; use of physical force generally. The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal under any of the following circumstances:
...
4. A person acting under a reasonable belief that another person is about to commit suicide or to inflict serious physical injury upon himself may use physical force upon such person to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to thwart such result.
...
Sec. 35.15 Justification; use of physical force in defense of a person.
1. A person may, subject to the provisions of subdivision two, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he reasonably believes such to be necessary to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by such other person, unless:
...
2. A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) He reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he knows that he can with complete safety as to himself and others avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that he is under no duty to retreat if he is:
(i) in his dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or
(ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter`s direction, acting pursuant to section 35.30; or
(b) He reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible sodomy or robbery; or
(c) He reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of section 35.20.

Ref

That's a whole lot of "believes" and not a lot of "actual threat". I'm honestly curious, how would you legally define "actual threat" vs. "believes there's a threat"? I've yet to see a good answer, which quite honestly I would like to have in law to eliminate any sorts of ambiguity that might cause tragedies like this. And of course, there's still the question of "knowing with complete safety", that sounds like a higher bar than "reasonableness". Not that it's a bad thing to have in the law; I haven't heard of any cases where anything other than disguised murder has been prosecuted under DTR - it's just an awfully high bar. Legitimate mugger with a knife in an empty parking lot by your car, would you say you Know With Complete Safety you could outrun them?


Here's GA's law while I'm at it. Looks like the same standard as NY, just sans DTR. Though I don't see how a doddering senile old man with a dog meets any of the standards in 16-3-23. (redacted for brevity):

16-3-21
(a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
...
16-3-23
A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s unlawful entry into or attack upon a habitation; however, such person is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner and he or she reasonably believes that the entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or offering personal violence to any person dwelling or being therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the assault or offer of personal violence;
(2) That force is used against another person who is not a member of the family or household and who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using such force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred; or
(3) The person using such force reasonably believes that the entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony therein and that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.